New AMD Ryzen Chip pics

I have one in my hand right now. I'm not directly building the system, but it's right behind me, and I'm throwing some advice out there to make it as fast as possible (for a contest). It's kind of fun...breaking up the monotony of fixing Dells all day long.
 
When you get older and fingers get a sore and tired from arthritis, the chance of dropping them increases. I try to be as careful as possible, but have dropped them at times.
I managed to get one fixed but had to throw others away!
Thanks to Intel for a much better design!

Edit: I've thrown away Athlon, Duron, Phenom etc, not the new Ryzen.
I'll be sticking with Intel so I wont have to worry about it!;)
 
Sounds like good news to me, I don't really like AMD but intel is either going to respond with a price drop or and what im hoping for a sweet reveal of something powerful.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GTP
ComputerRepairTech said:
Sounds like good news to me, I don't really like AMD but intel is either going to respond with a price drop or and what im hoping for a sweet reveal of something powerful.
Click to expand...

They did a price drop already. Tells me they are very worried. From what I am reading around the web most think the drop in price is a confirmation of how good the AMD Ryzen is.

Im really excited too. Im afraid that when 3/2 hits they will sell out their stock again from filling the preorders and buying out right. So, I dont know if Ill get it right away. Hopefully I do. Going for the x1800.
 
I think most of my clients have forgotten what AMD is by now. Apart from their "Intel Inside" stickerd laptop with a sticker that boasts "AMD Graphics!" Most don't even know what AMD Graphics actually are either. (Nor do they care)
I dont think I'll bother trying to market anything AMD as They all know what/who Intel is.
And when it comes to "graphics cards" for desktops/gaming rigs, they never ask for AMD - it's always nVidia!
I haven't sold an AMD CPU or graphics card in years!
 
Wish this new processor well; perhaps it will bring prices down on some of Intel's higher end SKUs. (Figures, after my own 7700K just arrived 2 days ago!)
 
MDD1963 said:
Wish this new processor well; perhaps it will bring prices down on some of Intel's higher end SKUs. (Figures, after my own 7700K just arrived 2 days ago!)
Click to expand...

I wouldn't worry. The 7700K may have cost you more but it will be cheaper to run, run cooler and be more powerful than any AMD offering!
 
Barcelona said:
I wouldn't worry. The 7700K may have cost you more but it will be cheaper to run, run cooler and be more powerful than any AMD offering!
Click to expand...

Not so sure; the top Ryzen will only be a 90 watt or so affair, roughly matching the 7700K, and, certainly all the preliminary benchmarks show the assorted Ryzen 8 core processors as being pretty formidable at multithreaded tasks. Once the Ryzen actually releases, we can get some benchmarks that compare 'real world IPC' at both stock and overclocked speeds. (Gaming benchmarks at 1080P rarely lie!)

I have little need to start tinkering with multipliers just yet, and, I am enjoying and am comfortable with the following CPU core temps (at default 4.2 GHz) during typical use, compliments of the Noctua DH-15.

temps.jpg
 
Barcelona said:
I wouldn't worry. The 7700K may have cost you more but it will be cheaper to run, run cooler and be more powerful than any AMD offering!
Click to expand...

We get it, your an intel guy and your not changing your mind... but PLEASE stop making stuff up.

This is hearsay until the chips launch, and some real world benching is done. From what we have
"heard" so far, a chip like the 1600X will cost $259. For that you get a 6 core 12 thread CPU, with
a 95W TDP (compared to Intel's 91W), 16MB L3 cache and a stock turbo clock of 3.7ghz. This
CPU may easily be able to scale into the low 4GHZ range. Your saving $100 and gaining two cores
and four threads.

Cheaper to run? If those 4W of TDP make a difference I guess...

Run cooler? Eh... the 7700K has terrible issues with it's TIM. I actually am willing to bet that the this
is not true. Those chips just have a huge defect in the TIM... unless you wanna delid and fix that
problem yourself....

More powerful than any AMD offering...... Even in the 1600X vs 7700K that's just flat out wrong. The
7700K will most likely have a small single thread IPC advantage... but enough to justify the $100 extra
cost? The 1800X trades blows VERY well with the 6900K at half the price, 95W TDP vs 140W TDP...
again at least that is what the rumors suggest.

Now, it's very possible this is all BS and most of the "info" is fabricated. Could be the case I guess until
we get the chips in our hands.... but really like I said no need to go to the other extreme and declare
Intel the champ when the Ryzen chips aren't in the wild yet.


My first custom workstation I built myself back in 05 featured an AMD Opteron 165 socket 939. What a
beauty of a chip. I did get burned a little on the silicon lottery, as mine wasn't all that great of an OC'er
compared to what some could get out of theirs. Great chip though, and the same thing happened to me.
3 months after I buy my Opteron 165 and AMD X1800 XT graphics card (see why the new CPU naming
system is strange to me?) both of those $300 parts fell to about $150. Talk about an instant devaluation
of $300!

My second go around in 2010 feature an intel i7 930... simply because it was the best offering for my
price range at the time, and a strong value buy.

The next time I build... hopefully AMD has proven strong enough to shake up the market. It's good for
everyone, including Intel only folks. It will at least mean better prices for them.
 
MDD1963 said:
HardOCP is showing some early gaming benchmarks from an Iranian website pitting a 1700X against the usual Intel suspects, using a GTX980 in both systems; so far, it does not look Intel has much to fear in the gaming benchmarks....

https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http://www.shahrsakhtafzar.com/fa/review/cpu/11652-amd-ryzen-7-1700x-review?showall=1&limitstart&edit-text=
Click to expand...

Ouch. If those reviews hold and this isn't down to software/firmware AMD could be in trouble in more ways than one..

With the 7700K now dropping sub $300 (Staples - $292) i'm not sure the 1700x is a compelling deal at $399 as it fails to compete in many of the areas for which people are going to be buying them.

Video that goes over the posted review:
 
Last edited:
brandonkick said:
but PLEASE stop making stuff up.
Click to expand...
I didn't "make stuff up" and I'm sorry if the truth hurts, but as the last ten years at least is testament to the voracity of the statement I cant make up "the truth!"
brandonkick said:
Even in the 1600X vs 7700K that's just flat out wrong.
Click to expand...
So, your an "AMD guy," I respect that, but now, who's "making stuff up?"
brandonkick said:
Cheaper to run? If those 4W of TDP make a difference I guess...
Click to expand...
And yes 4 watts DOES make a difference when you have a larger network of server/workstations. In a home use situation, maybe not so much of a worry for the "not budget concious" out there, but very much factored into the ROI of the businesses I support!
An "Intel Guy?" Hardly, I would sell Qualcomm or Exynos chips if they were comparable to Intel! But I am in the business of making money so I sell what my customers ask for - and they DON'T ask for AMD!
BTW, NONE of my clients "overclock, they wouldn't even know what overclocking meant! So buying cheaper AMD chips and overclocking them is, IMHO, both pointless and could have serious and costly come back on me and/or my business.
Surely, you don't want me to explain why?
 
All I can say is that we are clearly not going to agree on this. But it reminds me of those verizon commercials on TV, where the guy asks if someone would pay twice as much for 1% better service.

Sure, the 6900K is probably going to be classed "just" above the 1800X, but is that worth $550? And in that example... the 1800X is a 95W TDP where as the 6900K is 140W.

Even across a business with 100 workstations, an extra 4W per hour per machine is nothing. Assuming that the machines average 10 hours a day running, at 400W per hour you wind up with 4KW of extra power usage per day. At, say 15 cents per KW, that's an extra 60 cents per day or roughly 18 dollars a month. What kind of business, of a size that has over 100 workstations running, misses 18 dollars a month. I'm one of the most frugal, non wasting people out there. 60 cents a day for a business that size isn't enough to worry about.

If the 1600X, a $259 chip, is even within 10% performance of the 7700K.... it's still a worth while solution. The $90 savings across each of the 100 workstations. Will basically pay the difference in the power bill until those machines are ready to be retired. In multi threaded applications, the 7700K is a bit undermatched as it's at a 2 core / 4 thread disadvantage.

You also don't need to overclock the 1800X for it to be nipping right at the heels of intels flagship 6900K.

And again, I'm a fanboy of nothing. If Intel slashes the price of the 7700K to $199, then I'll just buy one of
those. Donald Trump himself can start making CPU's, and if they offer a strong value in terms of price to performance ratio... then I'll be running a Trump processor. I couldn't care less who's name or face is on it.
 
To me this is what matters for me. This makes Ryzen a real deal.

Phoronix-Test-Kernal-Compile_zps0sjtpvyx.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

GTP
Building a new system...
Replies
10
Views
2K
Kitten Kong
Kitten Kong
Metanis
[TIP] I didn't even know AMD had Professional drivers!
Replies
0
Views
514
Metanis
Metanis
Appletax
[SOLVED] How to avoid issues with new PC build that has Ryzen 7 7800X3D?
Replies
4
Views
981
Sky-Knight
Sky-Knight
britechguy
Any favorite "off brand" NUCs you've tried?
2
Replies
27
Views
3K
britechguy
britechguy
Sky-Knight
Intel / AMD Microcode Updates (Keep Pushing!)
Replies
0
Views
921
Sky-Knight
Sky-Knight
Back
Top